I'm talking about single image on the Timeline. There are recognized 2048, 960, 720 px width standards. However Facebook's 100kb limit is annoying. Everything over 100kb is severely compressed. Things get even worse with portrait orientation images. The Hi-res upload function does not help much. Therefore, one needs to think of dimensions and techniques to preserve a photo against distortion whrn posted to Facebook. Fellas, how do you handle it?Any ecommendations, personal techniques and experiences are greately appreciated.Thanks,Alex

I've been having pretty good luck with 300kb @ 1280px longest side. I used to get better results with a png, but not anymore It's a constant battle isn't it. It'd be nice if they gave us some clear guidelines.

Same here, I gave up uploading PNGs, though I could not do better with JPGs. There are available guidelines https://www.facebook.com/help/266520536764594sort of...Anyway, anything over 100kb is compressed urging you post rather Malevich's Balck Square than photographs

Okay, I hadn't found that page. Thanks. A few weeks ago, I tried about 100 different combinations and that's how I came up with the 300kb @ 1280px. But now I'll give it another try at <100kb. Thanks Alex

I don't use facebook, but when I have to strip down an image to the minimum bearable, I normally use jpegoptim. On a mac you can easily install it with homebrew. For convenience I use it within an automator app and an open with shortcut that gets things done quickly from the finder. From the top of my head, there's also ImageOptim (app) which is quite nice - based on it image_optim - they also have some png alpha thingie, and caesium for mac and win. For critical compression/colour/accuracy maximum ratio, the best I've seen is TinyPanda/Jpeg - you can compress till 20 files online, their PS plugin's expensive!!BTW, as this site's user level is quite high I feel the need to be straight-forward: these are 2 cents of someone who knows absolutelly nothing about code, but has two eyes and follows copy paste ancient tradition {no fat budha}

Somethin' of the sorts (quality 71) // notice there's also a size option

Alright, I've conducted some tests with my facebook page and most of the sizes/methods suggested in this thread. I tried: 1) parameters suggested by @D_W ;2) parameters suggested by Harry Durgin;3) compression method suggested by @chroma_ghost

For all methods I used portrait orientation image produced in PNG and JPG formats.

1) @D_W 's parameters yielded the best result. The best file extension is PNG. The best dimension is 2048 px. However, I must say that this 2048px length is not applicable only to the width, as suggested by @D_W in the article. Pursuant the Facebook's guidelines, and as here tested by myself, 2048px should be the longest side, i.e. which ever is longer: 2048px max width for landscape orientation OR 2048px max height for portrait orientation.

2) @harry_durgin 's parameters were not the best, though not the worst, comparing to Facebook's recognized 720/960/2048 px dimensions. Right in the middle as also seen from the figures.

3) although @chroma_ghost did not suggest any exact parameters, I decided to pick something from his advice too. I tried this https://tinypng.com/ and, my PNG dropped sweet -69% of its size. However, color artifacts were noticeable in saturated areas. (I will also try the ImageOptim later when I have time).

So, the conclusion I've made, with your kindly provided advice, is the best parameters for Facebook are: PNG image with 2048px longer side

A bit OT, more like an update on re-scale/compression's methods I mentioned

Either 'cause I'm lazy or stupid (hopefully both) and contrary to what everybody and their dog say, I never sharpen images after downscale, instead I use algos that retain the perceived original sharpness adapted to a smaller size, that's what I tell doctor Martin.

Anyway, after trying newest and shiniest {cough cough, fart, smile} google's compression algo Guetzli, which is unbearably slow, changed my WF to use Imagemagick's convert to batch dowscale images and Mozjpeg's cjpeg to compress them. Results are tiny MGP motherfucka group of pixels that travel fast through the interweb's veins

Methodology, set enviroment covering lamps with red flammable cheap synthetic cloth, loud music, have at hand enough whiskey, ice-cream and belly dancers, if that's not possible (living on an igloo) beer and old cat with strange disease will do. WHITE ROBE and thick glasses, live stream to YT

From photoshop I exported the base png, not included (very big). Also within photoshop I dowscaled with c3c (micro-contrast + 1 sharpness) and exported with tinyJPG; c3c/c3c_plusSH and c3c_tiny samples. On the other hand I downscaled the pngs with Imagemagick convert "$f" -resize 1400 "${f%.*}_magic.jpg" (magic samples) and compressed them with mozjpeg, settings above (moz samples), jpegoptim quality 84 (optim samples) and one of them - sorry but takes too long with guetzli guetzli --quality 84 input output Also tried github suggested parallel processing with multiple inputs, still too slow. Put down the cat, END

I have come to terms with the aggressive compression by simply feeding Facebook the highest quality image and enabling high quality. My rationale is that the way Facebook will handle any given image is a black box and subject to change. I see little point in lowering the quality or otherwise manipulating the source only to have Facebook do its worst on top of that. That said, there are always new methods to explore .

I guess the alternative would be to upload the images elsewhere and link them to Facebook. I haven't explored this yet. It would be great if someone could give me some pointers (maybe in a new thread). I am looking for an option that is free, private, long lasting and plays nice with Facebook.